When did it become acceptable.............

[native]

Still doesn't change the point that Hispanics are not the first group to not easily assimilate

Agreed. The Italian-American Mafia has gotta be one of the older ones STILL around.

Hispanics - specifically illegal Mexican and central American immigrants, may not be the first group not to easliy assimilate, but you would be hard pressed to find a group which fought so hard against assimilation and for special privileges to break the law.

As Trip notes, the mafia (more specifically the Sicilian mafia) has been a cancerous blight on American society. But it has been counterbalanced by a heroic group of patriotic Itailian-American super-acheivers like Fiorello LaGuardia, Francis Ford Coppola, Rudi Giuliani and Antonin Scalia who have fought corruption and are representative of an immigrant group that has contributed far more than they have taken from America.

But in contrast to the illegal immigrant lobby, even the lawbreaking Sicilian mob are often Americans first, as opposed to M-13 and the Azltanistas, for example.

Where are the American heroes among the illegal alien lobby? There are none. There are Hispanic Heroes and Patriots, but none among the illegal lobby.

[∞∞∞]

edit: native answered

[dbackjon]

Wrong on the Germans - many actively supported Germany before the US entry in WWI. There were many German language schools, German newspapers, etc.

After the US Entry into WWI, many states banned German-language schools. Most German Language newspapers folded under pressure.

Points well taken, jon, but a large majority of former Germans, like those in central Texas and my Mennonite neighbors, spoke English, assimilated into American society, and were grateful to be here, even while striving to maintain ethnic pride and heritage - before and after WWI and WWII. Moreover, they were here legally.

Ethnic pride is not the issue.

Look up the Volga Germans.

Also, in many US cities from 1848 to the turn of the century, Germans immigrants/children were the majority, and many German customs/language/loyalties were kept.

[JMU DJ]

Yes, Alpha Griz made a valid point that many immigrants and immigrant groups in our nation's history have been grateful for the opportunity to be here and be Americans, and work hard NOT to import the violence and political dysfunction from their old countries.

Can you show me where in this thread Alphie has said anything about the history of immigration in America? This is your interpretation, and had Alphie originally made a statement like this, I wouldn't have brought up the other points about immigration history in America.

I would add to Alphie's point that most immigrant groups have historically embraced the idea of American exceptionalism and wanted to be American, even in extreme cases where some groups carried over violence and politics from the old country. The lack of belief in American exceptionalism is indeed a recent historical phenomenon. Your own lack of belief does not change these facts.

True, but I believe in the idea of being "American" and America being built on "American Exceptionalism" based off of the uniqueness of immigrants from many different backgrounds instead of a homogeneous population coming together to form it. It's a broad based assumption that Hispanic immigrants are not assimilating into American society, tell that to the families of Hero Street.

Illegals on the other hand, obviously not as they would come legally or make attempts to become legal if they truly supported the American Ideals. If you want to talk about that, sure, I have no argument with you or Alphie.

You are quick to jump on Alpha Griz DJ, but you paint with the same broad brush to which you seem to object.

Not objecting to Alphie, just pointing out his lack of incite when it comes to the history of immigration in this country. It's simple points, no broad brush, no where did I say "all," "majority," etc... they are factual, historic points. Again, Alphie seems to only focus on recent immigrants.

Native is so much smarter than the rest of you its hard to watch........................

Agreed, Native is a very smart individual. It's a shame you can't make educated responses like him.

[native]

Points well taken, jon, but a large majority of former Germans, like those in central Texas and my Mennonite neighbors, spoke English, assimilated into American society, and were grateful to be here, even while striving to maintain ethnic pride and heritage - before and after WWI and WWII. Moreover, they were here legally.

Ethnic pride is not the issue.

Look up the Volga Germans.

Also, in many US cities from 1848 to the turn of the century, Germans immigrants/children were the majority, and many German customs/language/loyalties were kept.

What is your point, jonboy? "Volga Germans" would make up the majority of my childhood Mennonite neighbors. Of course they kept many of their customs and continue to do so to this day, but to Alphie's point, they came here to avoid the death camps and persecutions they faced in the old world - gratefully so - not to desecrate the new world or disrespect their new neighbors with the that old country baggage.

[native]

... Can you show me where in this thread Alphie has said anything about the history of immigration in America? ...

Yes! Alph's original post pretty much sums up the history of immigration to the U.S. :

...If you move here from Israel, Mexico, Palestine etc you moved more than likely because your country is a shithole and you wanted out...

AlphaGriz1 haters read a lot more into his words than I did, DJ. He deserves credit for the straighfoward points made in his original post:

1. People from other countries have come to the USA (legally) seeking a better life for themselves and their children.

2. It has not been historically acceptable when they get here to take up causes about their former country.
(AG1 did not make the claim that it has never been done - only that it is not acceptable.)

3. Most people come to escape problems from the old country and work hard as "Americans" to make this country better. (NOT as Yankee nativists which AG1 haters falsely imply; AG1 did not claim that all Americans come in the same ethnic package. Rather, he explicitly and quite correctly criticized certain unacceptable behaviors.)

4. If you move here to implement the same problems, we think your're a bunch of ungrateful *******.

Alphie is exactly correct. Today's illegal alien lobby is qualitatively worse than other historical immigration movements. I would add that the illegal lobby is quantitatively worse as well. His emphasis on the recent illegal immigration problems is appropriate. AG1 DID bring up the concept LEGAL immigration in his original post, DJ. I did not add it later.

...Not objecting to Alphie, just pointing out his lack of incite when it comes to the history of immigration...

I disagree that Alpha Griz lacks historical insight or empathy. He simply makes his points more succinctly than the rest of us.

[JMU DJ]

... Can you show me where in this thread Alphie has said anything about the history of immigration in America? ...

Yes! Alph's original post pretty much sums up the history of immigration to the U.S. :

...If you move here from Israel, Mexico, Palestine etc you moved more than likely because your country is a shithole and you wanted out...

Talk about reading to much into a post.


I'm glad you are able to surmise the immigration history of America from such a succinct post.

[native]

Yes! Alph's original post pretty much sums up the history of immigration to the U.S.

Talk about reading to much into a post.

I'm glad you are able to surmise the immigration history of America from such a succinct post.

Funny, yes, but your criticism is not quite on target, DJ. Few of us bother to read a long-winded original post. The 4 or 5 points made in AlphaGriz1's succinct original post were historically accurate and relevant to the thread he started.

Nobody but me, kalm, and T-man desire or expect well researched essays with footnotes.

What part of his original post do you think lacks insight or accuracy?

[Chizzang]

So does ALPH-ALPHA pay you to cover for his buffoonery ignorance and blatant factual gaffs..?

Yes immigrant ingrates are annoying
When did it become acceptable..? Never it's not acceptable..
it's common Yes
it's problematic Yes
it's an observable historical trend Yes

Acceptable Not really

There Alph-Alpha's childish & really banal question answered... can we go back to the adults table now


~

[native]

So does ALPH-ALPHA pay you to cover for his buffoonery ignorance and blatant factual gaffs..?

Yes immigrant ingrates are annoying
When did it become acceptable..? Never it's not acceptable..
it's common Yes
it's problematic Yes
it's an observable historical trend Yes

Acceptable Not really

There Alph-Alpha's childish & really banal question answered... can we go back to the adults table now

~

Glad you agree with me and Alph, Cleets!

It must really suck for the libs to continuously get their asses kicked intellectually by a "childish, banal" buffoon.

[Chizzang]

So does ALPH-ALPHA pay you to cover for his buffoonery ignorance and blatant factual gaffs..?

Yes immigrant ingrates are annoying
When did it become acceptable..? Never it's not acceptable..
it's common Yes
it's problematic Yes
it's an observable historical trend Yes

Acceptable Not really

There Alph-Alpha's childish & really banal question answered... can we go back to the adults table now

~

Glad you agree with me and Alph, Cleets!

It must really suck for the libs to continuously get their asses kicked intellectually by a "childish, banal" buffoon.

Agree with him..?
Here's what I agree with regarding Alpha
1) He's fat and slow yet somehow thinks he's a bad ass
2) He's intellectually lazy or incredibly ignorant (you choose)
3) He likes is Political information spoon fed to him in the smallest sound bites possible
4) He thinks "Knee Jerk reaction" equals "Deep intellectual reasoning"

He is the worst kind of American... Fat lazy and stupid
Yes he's Patriotic but so were the Huns

You two are perfect for each other - you can spoon feed him and he can Knee Jerk (It works perfectly)

[native]

Glad you agree with me and Alph, Cleets!

It must really suck for the libs to continuously get their asses kicked intellectually by a "childish, banal" buffoon.

Agree with him..?
Here's what I agree with regarding Alpha
1) He's fat and slow yet somehow thinks he's a bad ass
2) He's intellectually lazy or incredibly ignorant (you choose)
3) He likes is Political information spoon fed to him in the smallest sound bites possible
4) He thinks "Knee Jerk reaction" equals "Deep intellectual reasoning"

He is the worst kind of American... Fat lazy and stupid
Yes he's Patriotic but so were the Huns

You two are perfect for each other - you can spoon feed him and he can Knee Jerk (It works perfectly)

You think you condemn AlpaGriz but you actually condemn yourself. Unnecessarily, I might add. Sad.

[Chizzang]

Agree with him..?
Here's what I agree with regarding Alpha
1) He's fat and slow yet somehow thinks he's a bad ass
2) He's intellectually lazy or incredibly ignorant (you choose)
3) He likes is Political information spoon fed to him in the smallest sound bites possible
4) He thinks "Knee Jerk reaction" equals "Deep intellectual reasoning"

He is the worst kind of American... Fat lazy and stupid
Yes he's Patriotic but so were the Huns

You two are perfect for each other - you can spoon feed him and he can Knee Jerk (It works perfectly)

You think you condemn AlpaGriz but you actually condemn yourself. Unnecessarily, I might add. Sad.

Don't be sad little fella (and) Don't kid yourself nativity... I love him sincerely
He is the perfect reflection of our America

[YoUDeeMan]

Glad you agree with me and Alph, Cleets!

It must really suck for the libs to continuously get their asses kicked intellectually by a "childish, banal" buffoon.

Agree with him..?
Here's what I agree with regarding Alpha
1) He's fat and slow yet somehow thinks he's a bad ass
2) He's intellectually lazy or incredibly ignorant (you choose)
3) He likes is Political information spoon fed to him in the smallest sound bites possible
4) He thinks "Knee Jerk reaction" equals "Deep intellectual reasoning"

He is the worst kind of American... Fat lazy and stupid
Yes he's Patriotic but so were the Huns

You two are perfect for each other - you can spoon feed him and he can Knee Jerk (It works perfectly)

Typical Harvard elitist. Instead of straight forward reasoning delivered in short, easily understood messages, you'd rather have Alpha write a 1,000 page research paper just so you can sip cordials and argue minutia.

Are you sure you weren't a part of the law school? At least they get paid to argue.

[Chizzang]

Agree with him..?
Here's what I agree with regarding Alpha
1) He's fat and slow yet somehow thinks he's a bad ass
2) He's intellectually lazy or incredibly ignorant (you choose)
3) He likes is Political information spoon fed to him in the smallest sound bites possible
4) He thinks "Knee Jerk reaction" equals "Deep intellectual reasoning"

He is the worst kind of American... Fat lazy and stupid
Yes he's Patriotic but so were the Huns

You two are perfect for each other - you can spoon feed him and he can Knee Jerk (It works perfectly)

Typical Harvard elitist. Instead of straight forward reasoning delivered in short, easily understood messages, you'd rather have Alpha write a 1,000 page research paper just so you can sip cordials and argue minutia.

Are you sure you weren't a part of the law school? At least they get paid to argue.

Cluck when have you ever posted something (anything) interesting..?
When have you shown us insights or depth of knowledge on a topic or your interests or specialties ..?

When will you..?

I'll tell you what, why don't you keep on being a dullard
A dullard who's collection of posts basically amount to: "Yeah, what he said..!"
and I'll keep doing what I do and you can stand on the sidelines (like you do) and boo or cheer in accordance to how your team is doing on the actual field...

Thank you for your support as a bystander...

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

Agree with him..?
Here's what I agree with regarding Alpha
1) He's fat and slow yet somehow thinks he's a bad ass
2) He's intellectually lazy or incredibly ignorant (you choose)
3) He likes is Political information spoon fed to him in the smallest sound bites possible
4) He thinks "Knee Jerk reaction" equals "Deep intellectual reasoning"

He is the worst kind of American... Fat lazy and stupid
Yes he's Patriotic but so were the Huns

You two are perfect for each other - you can spoon feed him and he can Knee Jerk (It works perfectly)

Fu*k You Cleets!!

I am not slow.

[YoUDeeMan]

Typical Harvard elitist. Instead of straight forward reasoning delivered in short, easily understood messages, you'd rather have Alpha write a 1,000 page research paper just so you can sip cordials and argue minutia.

Are you sure you weren't a part of the law school? At least they get paid to argue.

Cluck when have you ever posted something (anything) interesting..?
When have you shown us insights or depth of knowledge on a topic or your interests or specialties ..?

When will you..?

I'll tell you what, why don't you keep on being a dullard
A dullard who's collection of posts basically amount to: "Yeah, what he said..!"
and I'll keep doing what I do and you can stand on the sidelines (like you do) and boo or cheer in accordance to how your team is doing on the actual field...

Thank you for your support as a bystander...

Oh, I can blather on with anyone when it is needed, but the simple fact is that often it is unnecessary to go into detail about things. In fact, it is often counterproductive to do so.

For example, Americans, in general, are fatter than previous generations. "Intellectuals", doing their best to find the reason for such a trend, will drone on forever about studies that show X impact on a certain demographic. Woo-hoo! Hey, 84 year old men born on full moon Tuesdays after their mothers gave a BJ 9 months earlier to a man who ate bacon 24 hours earlier tend to weigh, on average, 5% more than their peers (the study has been peer reviewed and is accurate within 5%, but there remain questions as to whether all mothers were honest and accurate about the timing of the BJ and the identity and diet of the person on the receiving end of the BJ)! Great stuff! And it only took 6 people and a $400,000 grant to discover such a finding.

Seriously, the window dressing can be interesting, but the simple fact is that people these days are not getting enough exercise. Of course, no one wants to hear that because they must find someone (read that as a corporation or big, bad, oppressive race/religious group, etc.) at fault. Heaven forbid that it might be caused by our own lifestyle choices.

Here's the solution: put an ad out that says, "You are fat because you don't get enough exercise. Go run in the park, screw your partner (for more than three minutes - learn some control for God's sake), dodge some gunfire, whatever it takes...get out of the house and get your heart beating faster than you have in quite some time. then go out and do it all again tomorrow."

Sure, you'll get complaints from the small percentage of people who are overweight due to some medical condition, and you might get some resistance from the religious right, and heck, you might even get some confusing complaints and compliments from the fiscal conservatives due to the projected increased health care costs related to a higher birth rate and healthier, but longer longer living population, and you might even get some complaints from the pro-illegal immigration lobby because...well, we could get into an intellectual conversation about that angle, but the message is pretty clear...exercise or get fat. One can drone on all day and post all sorts of excuses (ooops, I mean latest studies) to find the societal cure for the blob syndrome, but it really is an exercise in futility. Rich or poor the answer is the same - exercise or get fat. It really is that simple.

And to address the "your team" thing...it seems it is only you and a few others that think I am on some sort of "team". You should be smart enough to recognize that a person views the world from his/her own perspective and that it is you who are stuck on the team theme. Why is that, Cleets? Not enough elasticity in the grey matter to deal with a person as an individual? Or do you first have to have a beer with someone in order to appreciate them as an individual?

If you would like to engage in an in-depth conversation, we can talk about sailing...competative sailing, leisure sailing, the physics of sailing, the development of sailing vessels (shapes, materials, functions), sail materials, the impact sailing had on the development and spread of civilization. Wonderful topic. Here are some others: Squids...not the sailors. Marketing. History. Fishing. Politics (oops, you don't like the simple solutions). Weeds - hey, a guy's gotta' survive. Ants. Music. Group behavior. Skiing. Pick one.

[JMU DJ]

Here's the solution: put an ad out that says, "You are fat because you don't get enough exercise. Go run in the park, screw your partner (for more than three minutes - learn some control for God's sake), dodge some gunfire, whatever it takes...get out of the house and get your heart beating faster than you have in quite some time. then go out and do it all again tomorrow."

Amen, but this won't do anything for those fat fucks who like to play the bull at the rodeo.

[houndawg]

Cluck when have you ever posted something (anything) interesting..?
When have you shown us insights or depth of knowledge on a topic or your interests or specialties ..?

When will you..?

I'll tell you what, why don't you keep on being a dullard
A dullard who's collection of posts basically amount to: "Yeah, what he said..!"
and I'll keep doing what I do and you can stand on the sidelines (like you do) and boo or cheer in accordance to how your team is doing on the actual field...

Thank you for your support as a bystander...

Oh, I can blather on with anyone when it is needed, but the simple fact is that often it is unnecessary to go into detail about things. In fact, it is often counterproductive to do so.

For example, Americans, in general, are fatter than previous generations. "Intellectuals", doing their best to find the reason for such a trend, will drone on forever about studies that show X impact on a certain demographic. Woo-hoo! Hey, 84 year old men born on full moon Tuesdays after their mothers gave a BJ 9 months earlier to a man who ate bacon 24 hours earlier tend to weigh, on average, 5% more than their peers (the study has been peer reviewed and is accurate within 5%, but there remain questions as to whether all mothers were honest and accurate about the timing of the BJ and the identity and diet of the person on the receiving end of the BJ)! Great stuff! And it only took 6 people and a $400,000 grant to discover such a finding.

Seriously, the window dressing can be interesting, but the simple fact is that people these days are not getting enough exercise. Of course, no one wants to hear that because they must find someone (read that as a corporation or big, bad, oppressive race/religious group, etc.) at fault. Heaven forbid that it might be caused by our own lifestyle choices.

Here's the solution: put an ad out that says, "You are fat because you don't get enough exercise. Go run in the park, screw your partner (for more than three minutes - learn some control for God's sake), dodge some gunfire, whatever it takes...get out of the house and get your heart beating faster than you have in quite some time. then go out and do it all again tomorrow."

Sure, you'll get complaints from the small percentage of people who are overweight due to some medical condition, and you might get some resistance from the religious right, and heck, you might even get some confusing complaints and compliments from the fiscal conservatives due to the projected increased health care costs related to a higher birth rate and healthier, but longer longer living population, and you might even get some complaints from the pro-illegal immigration lobby because...well, we could get into an intellectual conversation about that angle, but the message is pretty clear...exercise or get fat. One can drone on all day and post all sorts of excuses (ooops, I mean latest studies) to find the societal cure for the blob syndrome, but it really is an exercise in futility. Rich or poor the answer is the same - exercise or get fat. It really is that simple.

And to address the "your team" thing...it seems it is only you and a few others that think I am on some sort of "team". You should be smart enough to recognize that a person views the world from his/her own perspective and that it is you who are stuck on the team theme. Why is that, Cleets? Not enough elasticity in the grey matter to deal with a person as an individual? Or do you first have to have a beer with someone in order to appreciate them as an individual?

If you would like to engage in an in-depth conversation, we can talk about sailing...competative sailing, leisure sailing, the physics of sailing, the development of sailing vessels (shapes, materials, functions), sail materials, the impact sailing had on the development and spread of civilization. Wonderful topic. Here are some others: Squids...not the sailors. Marketing. History. Fishing. Politics (oops, you don't like the simple solutions). Weeds - hey, a guy's gotta' survive. Ants. Music. Group behavior. Skiing. Pick one.

Damn! Ol' Chizz must have struck a little close there, Pluck - it's like he whacked a verbal pinata.

Blather on about sailing, something I've never had the opportunity to do and always been curious about. I have a friend from back in the day from Australia who was a big ocean racer and was part of the group that beat Dennis Conner for the Americas Cup. Said they had a great time watching him cry.

[native]

... I have a friend from back in the day from Australia who was a big ocean racer and was part of the group that beat Dennis Conner for the Americas Cup. Said they had a great time watching him cry.

...and I sure had a good time drinking their beer! I arrived in Sydney in 1983 on the same day that Alan Bond's Australia II prevailed over Dennis Connor's Liberty to take the cup from the Americans for the first time in 132 years. The beer was a flowin'!

[native]

...I'll keep doing what I do and you can stand on the sidelines (like you do) and boo or cheer in accordance to how your team is doing on the actual field...

Thank you for your support as a bystander...

Interesting line of attack for someone who demonstrates no ability to function on a team and is unlikely to have successfully participated in a team sport.

Although we do not coordinate our posts, I would be proud to serve on a team with any number of the conks of this board.

[YoUDeeMan]

Damn! Ol' Chizz must have struck a little close there, Pluck - it's like he whacked a verbal pinata.

Now that is a cheerleader’s response!

FWIW, Dennis Conner lost that series because he committed THE biggest error that a skipper, in a match race, could make…he failed to cover. It was a move that was born from arrogance or from a temporary stroke…a brain fart of monumental proportions.

Seriously, in a match race, once you get the lead, you cover your opponent on the upwind legs. There is no other rule….you just do it. A boat of equal ability is not going to be able to sail through the dead air behind your sail…physics is a bitch.

The ONLY ways a boat from behind gets past you on an upwind leg is to:

1) Beat you in a tacking duel… a tacking duel is when the boats engage in a series of turns through the wind with the lead boat following the trailing boat’s turns in order to stay between that boat and the wind. If you lose a tacking duel, then yo deserve to lose the race…the other team just performed better through their turns…had fewer mistakes…and you did your best and lost.
2) Be far enough away that it is not in the leader’s wind shadow…and the trailing boat sails the best leg of its life while the leading boat sails very poorly or has some sort of break down…either way, they deserve to lose.
3) Catch a wind shift. Boats can ‘t go directly into the wind so they sail as close to the wind as possible. If the wind shifts, the boats positions change relative to the wind…so a trailing boat can make gains (or incur a further loss). If both boats are on the same tack (going the same direction relative to the wind), that gain/loss is minimized. But if the boats are far apart and on separate tacks, the gains/losses can be huge. So, you stay on the same course as your opponent…staying between them and the wind.

Conner, with a huge lead, let the Aussie boat go off on its own course. The wind shifted course over 18 degrees and Conner was trailing at the next mark rounding.

Fool. It wasn’t that he lost the Cup…it was HOW he lost the Cup.

Frankly, it was amazing that he was in a position to win anyway. The Aussie’s had a better boat. Dennis was beating them. Then he blew it.

Trivia time: my wife owned Conner’s old Star. It is still sailing in Havre de Grace, MD.

If you are ever in the Delaware area, give me a PM and I’ll take you out sailing. And yes, I’ll bring you back.

[houndawg]

Damn! Ol' Chizz must have struck a little close there, Pluck - it's like he whacked a verbal pinata.

Now that is a cheerleader’s response!

FWIW, Dennis Conner lost that series because he committed THE biggest error that a skipper, in a match race, could make…he failed to cover. It was a move that was born from arrogance or from a temporary stroke…a brain fart of monumental proportions.

Seriously, in a match race, once you get the lead, you cover your opponent on the upwind legs. There is no other rule….you just do it. A boat of equal ability is not going to be able to sail through the dead air behind your sail…physics is a bitch.

The ONLY ways a boat from behind gets past you on an upwind leg is to:

1) Beat you in a tacking duel… a tacking duel is when the boats engage in a series of turns through the wind with the lead boat following the trailing boat’s turns in order to stay between that boat and the wind. If you lose a tacking duel, then yo deserve to lose the race…the other team just performed better through their turns…had fewer mistakes…and you did your best and lost.
2) Be far enough away that it is not in the leader’s wind shadow…and the trailing boat sails the best leg of its life while the leading boat sails very poorly or has some sort of break down…either way, they deserve to lose.
3) Catch a wind shift. Boats can ‘t go directly into the wind so they sail as close to the wind as possible. If the wind shifts, the boats positions change relative to the wind…so a trailing boat can make gains (or incur a further loss). If both boats are on the same tack (going the same direction relative to the wind), that gain/loss is minimized. But if the boats are far apart and on separate tacks, the gains/losses can be huge. So, you stay on the same course as your opponent…staying between them and the wind.

Conner, with a huge lead, let the Aussie boat go off on its own course. The wind shifted course over 18 degrees and Conner was trailing at the next mark rounding.

Fool. It wasn’t that he lost the Cup…it was HOW he lost the Cup.

Frankly, it was amazing that he was in a position to win anyway. The Aussie’s had a better boat. Dennis was beating them. Then he blew it.

Trivia time: my wife owned Conner’s old Star. It is still sailing in Havre de Grace, MD.

If you are ever in the Delaware area, give me a PM and I’ll take you out sailing. And yes, I’ll bring you back.

Thank you for the invitation. I think.

Sounds like chess on the water. What I don't get is how Conner, if he had a huge lead, could be close enough to keep the Aussies in his wind shadow?

Was that the boat that we had divers swimming under to get a look at the bottom? What kind of parameters do boats trade off when they're racing? Like how car racers might get less speed for better acceleration, that kind of stuff

BTW, John said that Dennis and the yanks were good folk. (John's from Adelaide and raced boats most of his life)

[YoUDeeMan]

Thank you for the invitation. I think.

Sounds like chess on the water. What I don't get is how Conner, if he had a huge lead, could be close enough to keep the Aussies in his wind shadow?

Was that the boat that we had divers swimming under to get a look at the bottom? What kind of parameters do boats trade off when they're racing? Like how car racers might get less speed for better acceleration, that kind of stuff

BTW, John said that Dennis and the yanks were good folk. (John's from Adelaide and raced boats most of his life)

Yes, that was the boat that had the divers. It introduced the bulb/fin keel which is now pretty standard on newer fixed keel racing boats.

As far as the differences in boats go, one design racing is the best because the boats are designed to be similar and the races come down to crew work - presuming everyone has the same sails. Old sails or improperly cut sails can make a huge difference. While one design races involve sailing identical boats, there are thousands of types of sailboats and many people would be unable to race due to there not being other boats of its kind in the area. So, they have have developed a handicap system that gives boats ratings based, among other things, their waterline (length), sail area (how much sail they can carry), displacement (weight), draft (depth), shape, rigging, and historical performance on the racing circuit. A boat is given a rating which roughly translates into a time over distance (or time, but that's another rating system).

To give you an idea of the rating system, here are the listings for JBoats. http://www.jboats.com/sailboat-phrf-handicap.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; You can see how some factors change a boat's rating. Lower rating = faster boat.

If two JBoats (or any type of boats) with two different ratings race, a boat could cross the finish line first but lose the race because they needed to beat the slower boat by a larger margin of time. If a race is 20 miles long, and you have a time advantage of 5 seconds per mile, then you need to beat your opponent by more than 100 seconds.

However, even boats with similar rating though, can perform much differently in different conditions or on different courses. The J90 (9.0 meters) is rated the same as a J39 (39 feet) but they are completely different boats - world's apart, really. A lighter boat with a 51 rating will do better in lighter air with less chop (waves) on the water than a heavier boat with the same rating. A heavier boat would do better in heavier air and more chop because it would plow through the waves instead of bobbing around on top. Some boats with the same rating will do better downwind versus upwind against their competitors. A race with 5 legs (upwind, downwind, upwind, downwind, upwind) would benefit the boat that has the better upwind sailing ability.

There are many more variables, and while I enjoy handicap racing, sometimes it is a crapshoot. I prefer one design...race against similar boats and let the best crew win.

Back to Conners: if you have a big lead, you won't be able to put the other guy in your wind shadow. However, you can limit the angle from which he can take advantage of new wind....you want to limit his leverage. Unless you are in some summer, patchy doldrums, wind changes come along in bursts covering a large swath of water. If you are between your opponent and the mark (the marker in the water that you must go around), and the mark is presumably directly upwind on a typical course, and you are sailing the same directional course as your opponent, then you are limiting the advantage the other boat can gain from a wind shift. Lay lines and other factors come into play, but that is too advanced for this forum.

Here is a good initial summary of the tactic of covering.

http://www.myboatsgear.com/newsletter/2007425.asp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[JMU DJ]

What the hell is going on here.